IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/acctbr/v43y2013i6p605-635.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritising disclosures in the annual report

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Riise Johansen
  • Thomas Plenborg

Abstract

Drawing upon information economics, this paper presents a relative assessment of 24 of the most common disclosure items in the management commentary and notes sections of the annual report. We design and conduct an Internet survey using a large representative sample of users with an investment focus ( n = 288) and preparers of annual reports ( n = 89). Using cost-effectiveness analysis, an evaluation method widely used in healthcare economics, the balance between preparation costs and user satisfaction, relative to user demand is assessed. Our main findings show that corporate social responsibility and corporate governance, the least demanded disclosure items in the management commentary, are also costly items to prepare. Further, preparers do not consider indirect costs (i.e. competitive position costs and potential litigation costs) of information provided in the management commentary to be a major concern. With regard to the notes, we find that business combinations (IFRS 3), financial instruments (IFRS 7) and impairment tests (IAS 36) are highly demanded but are also among the items most costly to prepare, and users are less satisfied with these notes. The findings have important implications for practitioners and policy-makers and can be used for setting priorities.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Riise Johansen & Thomas Plenborg, 2013. "Prioritising disclosures in the annual report," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 605-635, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:43:y:2013:i:6:p:605-635
    DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2013.827105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00014788.2013.827105
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00014788.2013.827105?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alain Schatt & Leonidas Doukakis & Corinne Bessieux-Ollier & Elisabeth Walliser, 2016. "Do Goodwill Impairments by European Firms Provide Useful Information to Investors?," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 307-327, September.
    2. Atanasov, Atanas, 2019. "Репутацията Като Обект На Счетоводството: Признаване, Оценяване, Оповестяване [Goodwill as an accounting object: initial recognition, measurement, disclosure]," MPRA Paper 97938, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Nicola Giuseppe Castellano & Katia Corsi & Roberto Del Gobbo, 2015. "Goodwill Disclosure in Europe. Profiles of disclosing companies," Eastern European Business and Economics Journal, Eastern European Business and Economics Studies Centre, vol. 1(2), pages 32-65.
    4. Su, Kun & Zhang, Miaomiao & Liu, Chengyun, 2022. "Financial derivatives, analyst forecasts, and stock price synchronicity: Evidence from an emerging market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Carla Carvalho & Ana Maria Rodrigues & Carlos Ferreira, 2016. "The Recognition of Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets in Business Combinations – The Portuguese Case," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 26(1), pages 4-20, March.
    6. Alatawi, Ibrahim A. & Ntim, Collins G. & Zras, Anis & Elmagrhi, Mohamed H., 2023. "CSR, financial and non-financial performance in the tourism sector: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    7. repec:eeb:15v1n2:v:1:y:2015:i:2:p:32-65 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:43:y:2013:i:6:p:605-635. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RABR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.